tive, is sufficiently defined to disprove an infinity of successions.

The researches of the Geognost are not, moreover, confined to the illustration of the Record, in this its disproval of the doctrines of materialism. They ascend higher in the scale, and afford the clearest demonstration of the Divine attribute of goodness. This they effect in two ways; both by the dispositions which they detect as at present existing on the surface of our planet, and by the succession of changes which they announce as having led to them, since the first act of creative power. They have elicited, with respect to these, the important facts, that each series of changes in the geognostic edifice has been for the better; that it has introduced a more perfect order of beings in each kingdom of nature; that the circumstances which accompanied each have contributed by their joint operation, to place the inhabitants of the present earth in possession of all the advantages arising from previous dispositions; that these events, in fine, which a reasonable analogy teaches us were many of them consequent on the agency of second causes, have been impressed with the character of all other physical arrangements-progress in improvement (ƒ).

It were easy for the advocate of Revelation to extend this reasoning beyond the limits of present phænomena, and to argue in behalf of ulterior changes, tending to similar results. If, from the period at which the matter of our planet began to exist, Divine wisdom has directed the course of things in an ascent towards perfection, what reason have we to conclude, that the same law will not be observed for the future? That revelation announces not a fact, wholly consistent with all we learn from a different source-that "the elements shall melt

with fervent heat," and " a new earth" arise on the ruins of the present structure, fitted for the reception of higher orders of beings? (*)

This, however, is a question which, though abundantly interesting, presents no immediate connection with our present subject, which is, to lay down a precise rule for directing our inquiries as to the extent of the exertion of creative power announced in the first clause of the Mosaic record. It appears, from the considerations which have been offered, to be unsafe to argue in this instance "ex phænomenis" as to the extent of effectuation, we being destitute of all conception of the nature of this power; and that analogy is, for the same reason, a guide little more to be trusted. But let us appeal to revelation itself as its own interpreter, and submit its announcements to the test of probability. We cannot, it is true, point out an extent of agency; but we are also in ignorance of any assignable limitation to that extent and when that which is demonstrable on independent evidence presents itself in aid of our conceptions, it is difficult, merely on the ground of our incapability to advance to the point by our own unassisted efforts, to withhold assent from its testimony.

In this posture of mind Revelation finds us: to it we appeal for the fact, that "the foundations of the earth were laid,"...that its solid framework was completed,...by creative power. At this point we stop: secondary causes commence their operations; to be regarded themselves, soundly and philosophically, as a continued exercise of an active power, allied in the usual course of things with time, and in this respect differing from the former, which is as essentially independent of it as of other measures of determinate existence. When

(*) 2. Pet. iii. 12. 13.

therefore we appeal to any of the known phænomena of nature in behalf of the theistic doctrine, we do so merely in the way of illustration, and as they are subsidiary to our Scriptural evidence. We build no direct argument upon them; we deduce from them no positive inference.

In the geological question connected with the preceding details, namely, the mode in which it may have pleased the Creator to produce the present order of things on the surface of the globe, much diversity of opinion has prevailed. Amongst later writers, Mr. Penn has, misled as I conceive by an injudicious arrangement of the Mosaic narrative, limited the number of its revolutions to two; a series which will be found quite inadequate to account for geognostical phænomena(g). The progress of organic life observable in the different orders of strata, and of which the first traces appear in the clastic rocks, opposes an insuperable barrier to the reception of this opinion; one which impugns it with equal force, whether we receive the Wernerian law of petrifactions in its most general announcement, or reject it, from its liability to exceptions, as a basis of geognostical classification. It becomes therefore a problem of a very interesting nature, to ascertain the degree of evidence, which it is possible to elicit from the Mosaic record in behalf of a contrary theory; one attended not only by the sanction of authorities, which it were presumptuous to question, but by the clearest evidence of phænomena, to attest its soundness: and it may, perhaps, be esteemed a service, not unprofitable in its kind, rendered to the interests of Revelation, to mark the degree in which its announcements, in this important particular, approach the inferences of the scientific ob

server.

An analogy has been proposed by a Divine of the

English church, of the soundness of whose views respecting scriptural belief no doubt can be entertained, illustrative of this doctrine of Anteadamite worlds. The testimony derives the greater weight, from its occurring in a work devoted, in a principal degree, to a demonstration of the excellence of the Mosaic system, as founded on the principle of Creation; one which, though offering the only secure groundwork for the doctrines of Natural Theology, eluded the researches of the most enlightened philosophers of antiquity; one which essentially involves the several proofs of the Divine Attributes, when viewed in its full extent of application; and to preserve the inviolate belief of which the Hebrew code was singularly adapted.

"Alternate revolutions" (says Mr. Sumner, treating of the Baron Cuvier's theory) "are, in the science of Geology, what systems beyond our own are in Astronomy. They are matters of curious reflection and sublime interest; we are not called upon to deny the possible existence of previous worlds, from the wreck of which our globe was organized, and the ruins of which are now furnishing matter to our curiosity. The belief of their existence is indeed consistent with rational probability, and somewhat confirmed by the discoveries of astronomy as to the plurality of worlds” (h).

We may add to this testimony that of another Divine, whose opinion in geological subjects merits the highest degree of attention. We refer to the expressions of Professor Buckland in his Inaugural Lecture (*), pp. 24, 29, relative to the deposition of the secondary strata.

As those subjects will be resumed at greater length in the course of Lectures now offered to public notice, we cease any further consideration of them at present,

(*) Delivered at Oxford in 1819. See p. xii. supr.

and pass to a brief outline of their several heads, the better to exhibit, in their connection and progress, the views which have presented themselves relative to the Mosaic physics. It was deemed expedient, previously to our engaging with this subject, to deliver a lecture wholly prefatory, in explanation of the principles on which our inquiries were to be directed, as also to prepare the auditory to which they were to be addressed, for a statement of the characteristics of the Sacred writings in matters connected with philosophy. It comprised a summary of the effects produced, in all ages of the Christian church, on the form and spirit of religious belief, by the undue admixture of philosophical speculations; and offered some considerations relative to the sense in which the latter can be termed ancillary to the former.

The Second discourse presented a distinct statement of the immediate subject of investigation. It defined, in particular, the first principles of the Mosaic Record; and exhibited them, as at the same time consistent with those of physical science, and essential to the integrity and the permanence of theistic belief.

The influence of those principles on Hebrew literature were contrasted, in the Third lecture, with the effects produced on modern science, by an inadequate conception of their importance. The doctrine of Creation was enlarged upon, as a tenet forming a necessary part of a pure system of Theism, and sanctioned by the convictions of the founders of the inductive philosophy. Its reasonableness not discountenanced by geognostical discoveries.

The Fourth lecture announced some additional probabilities, in behalf of the soundness of this principle, from other phænomena of the natural world. It repre